Core activity 2.5: Criteria for reflective writing - RLO_CETL Approach

Core activity 2.5: Criteria for reflective writing RLO-CETL Approach

I actually found the RLO-CETL piece rather useful in that it provides a framework and a series of questions that can be applied to any given reflective opportunity. The reflective theorist history provided helpful if though not essential background and the simple learning styles questionnaire had merit.   But it was the simple questioning framework of something happened?, what happened?, so what?, and what next? which appeared the most powerful tool here.  The recognition that something had happened and a few questions to follow seem logical and easy to follow for those new to reflective writing. The explicit discussion of why reflect on page 8 was useful to recognize and therefore overcome the habitual  element to our thinking.  It highlighted the conscious effort required and why it is worth while. Section 9, on what should be written about, appeared rather obvious but in the final analysis if a student takes time to write about something that struck them as important enough to take the time to think about it and reflect then it has learning merit.  Whether that merit builds to a course objective is dependent upon the student, learning design and interpretation. Finally, students like to have an example to follow and the one provided on page 10 was sufficiently vague enough in terms of scenario to be applicable, but specific enough to demonstrate the requirements of reflective writing.  I feel I have a grasp of 'how' I should write reflectively, but little idea of how that can be translated into a tutor marking scheme where, as my colleagues have already outlined, the output and determination of development is still subjective.